<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Warm reactions (mostly) from politicians to CCiCap awards</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards</link>
	<description>Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Googaw</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375995</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Googaw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 15:45:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;If it was strong it would have been one of the winners.&lt;/i&gt;

This is the one and only NewSpace orbital HSF customer we are talking about here.  They &lt;i&gt;are&lt;/i&gt; the market and they can never err!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>If it was strong it would have been one of the winners.</i></p>
<p>This is the one and only NewSpace orbital HSF customer we are talking about here.  They <i>are</i> the market and they can never err!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: josh</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375915</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[josh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 22:41:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375915</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[i was wondering if windy could abstain from embarrassing himself yet again with another contrafactual rant. he couldn&#039;t:(]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i was wondering if windy could abstain from embarrassing himself yet again with another contrafactual rant. he couldn&#8217;t:(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Coastal Ron</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375885</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Coastal Ron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:42:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375885</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[amightywind wrote @ August 6th, 2012 at 1:41 pm

&quot;&lt;i&gt;Like Senator Mikulski I am outraged that the the strong ATK proposal was discarded.&lt;/i&gt;&quot;

You are confused:

â€œTodayâ€™s exciting news is the next step toward launching our U.S. astronauts to the space station on an American vehicle safely, and doing it as quickly as possible,â€ Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) said...

And what was supposedly &quot;strong&quot; about about the ATK proposal?  Their untested frankenstein rocket?  Their powerpoint spacecraft?  Their unknown ability to be a launch provider?

All three CCiCap winners use operational rockets, which means there is less risk than what ATK was proposing, and all three have had NASA pouring over their designs for three years or more, whereas ATK&#039;s Liberty spacecraft is still at the concept stage (i.e. just a shell).

If you disagree, fine, but show us some quantifiable evidence that ATK had a proposal that was anywhere close to what the winners had for a COMPLETE crew transportation solution.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>amightywind wrote @ August 6th, 2012 at 1:41 pm</p>
<p>&#8220;<i>Like Senator Mikulski I am outraged that the the strong ATK proposal was discarded.</i>&#8221;</p>
<p>You are confused:</p>
<p>â€œTodayâ€™s exciting news is the next step toward launching our U.S. astronauts to the space station on an American vehicle safely, and doing it as quickly as possible,â€ Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) said&#8230;</p>
<p>And what was supposedly &#8220;strong&#8221; about about the ATK proposal?  Their untested frankenstein rocket?  Their powerpoint spacecraft?  Their unknown ability to be a launch provider?</p>
<p>All three CCiCap winners use operational rockets, which means there is less risk than what ATK was proposing, and all three have had NASA pouring over their designs for three years or more, whereas ATK&#8217;s Liberty spacecraft is still at the concept stage (i.e. just a shell).</p>
<p>If you disagree, fine, but show us some quantifiable evidence that ATK had a proposal that was anywhere close to what the winners had for a COMPLETE crew transportation solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JimNobles</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375883</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JimNobles]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375883</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[amightywind wrote:  Like Senator Mikulski I am outraged that the the strong ATK proposal was discarded&quot;

The ATK proposal wasn&#039;t strong, it was weak.  If it was strong it would have been one of the winners.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>amightywind wrote:  Like Senator Mikulski I am outraged that the the strong ATK proposal was discarded&#8221;</p>
<p>The ATK proposal wasn&#8217;t strong, it was weak.  If it was strong it would have been one of the winners.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amightywind</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375861</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[amightywind]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375861</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[None of these decisions are likely to stand. The days of NASA&#039;s leftist leadership are numbered. Like Senator Mikulski I am outraged that the the strong ATK proposal was discarded. But the selection process wasn&#039;t about merit. It was about Obama&#039;s campaign contributors.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>None of these decisions are likely to stand. The days of NASA&#8217;s leftist leadership are numbered. Like Senator Mikulski I am outraged that the the strong ATK proposal was discarded. But the selection process wasn&#8217;t about merit. It was about Obama&#8217;s campaign contributors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vladislaw</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375860</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vladislaw]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375860</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DCSCA wrote:

Show the documents where SpaceX said they would fly a human, on their own dime by:

2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

Unless you can show me statements from SpaceX where they said they were prepared ON THEIR OWN DIME to fly humans by a date that has already passed then you are a liar. They have stated repeatedly they can fly humans three years after signing a contract, which they are just about to do.

SpaceX said they will, on their own dime, launch humans .. but it will take a longer if it is self financed.

So put up or shut up.

AND by the way, still waiting for your proof, by way of documents that the:

FAA was ready is issue license and regs for private citizens to launch humans on rockets starting in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock

Dept of Transportation was ready to provide regulations for private citizens to build and launch humans on rockets starting in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock


The DOD was willing to allow private citizens to build rockets and launch humans on them in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock


The Congress was willing to pass legislation that would allow private citizens to build and launch rockets with humans on them in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock


That the Whitehouse was willing to push for private citizens to build their own ballistic missiles in their backyard and launch humans on them. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock

The only tick tocking in reality is your constant lying and misrepresenting space issues.

Show the documents .... tick tock tick tock.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DCSCA wrote:</p>
<p>Show the documents where SpaceX said they would fly a human, on their own dime by:</p>
<p>2004<br />
2005<br />
2006<br />
2007<br />
2008<br />
2009<br />
2010<br />
2011<br />
2012</p>
<p>Unless you can show me statements from SpaceX where they said they were prepared ON THEIR OWN DIME to fly humans by a date that has already passed then you are a liar. They have stated repeatedly they can fly humans three years after signing a contract, which they are just about to do.</p>
<p>SpaceX said they will, on their own dime, launch humans .. but it will take a longer if it is self financed.</p>
<p>So put up or shut up.</p>
<p>AND by the way, still waiting for your proof, by way of documents that the:</p>
<p>FAA was ready is issue license and regs for private citizens to launch humans on rockets starting in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock</p>
<p>Dept of Transportation was ready to provide regulations for private citizens to build and launch humans on rockets starting in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock</p>
<p>The DOD was willing to allow private citizens to build rockets and launch humans on them in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock</p>
<p>The Congress was willing to pass legislation that would allow private citizens to build and launch rockets with humans on them in 1961. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock</p>
<p>That the Whitehouse was willing to push for private citizens to build their own ballistic missiles in their backyard and launch humans on them. Waiting 3 years and counting tick tock tick tock</p>
<p>The only tick tocking in reality is your constant lying and misrepresenting space issues.</p>
<p>Show the documents &#8230;. tick tock tick tock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pathfinder_01</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375818</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[pathfinder_01]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 14:56:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375818</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[â€œUnless they decide to fund more HTVâ€™s and ATVâ€™s those will both be done by 2017. They cost considerably more than what progress and dragon cost will ESA and Japan turn to Russia or the US for cargo runs?â€

Japan plans to continue HTV. ESA is another barrel of fish as they plan to stop ATV by 2016, but donâ€™t have clear plans to start anything else as they need something to trade for the ISS partnership. 

â€œAlso, will the U.S. still buy additional progress flights once we have domestic capability? If not I do not see only four cargo flights per year. It will probably more like 4-5 dragon and 2 or 3 Orbital flights with Orbital acting as the trash can on the way downâ€

The US plans not to use Progress once commercial cargo comes online.  Anyway Space X has 12 flights and Orbital 8 flights. It is more like 2-3  Dragon and 1-2 orbital flights a year unless NASA buys more.  In addition each commercial crew craft is supposed to be able to transport a small amount of cargo instead of crew as well.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>â€œUnless they decide to fund more HTVâ€™s and ATVâ€™s those will both be done by 2017. They cost considerably more than what progress and dragon cost will ESA and Japan turn to Russia or the US for cargo runs?â€</p>
<p>Japan plans to continue HTV. ESA is another barrel of fish as they plan to stop ATV by 2016, but donâ€™t have clear plans to start anything else as they need something to trade for the ISS partnership. </p>
<p>â€œAlso, will the U.S. still buy additional progress flights once we have domestic capability? If not I do not see only four cargo flights per year. It will probably more like 4-5 dragon and 2 or 3 Orbital flights with Orbital acting as the trash can on the way downâ€</p>
<p>The US plans not to use Progress once commercial cargo comes online.  Anyway Space X has 12 flights and Orbital 8 flights. It is more like 2-3  Dragon and 1-2 orbital flights a year unless NASA buys more.  In addition each commercial crew craft is supposed to be able to transport a small amount of cargo instead of crew as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heinrich Monroe</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375760</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Heinrich Monroe]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 05:14:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375760</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ah, the wit of DCSCA ... Whose comments about why &quot;it&#039;s not&quot; are the same old tired ones. Let me answer directly to one of the more hilarious &quot;nots&quot; we&#039;re here instructed about.

&lt;i&gt;Especially to the people who you pitch to pay the bills and who, for the most part, still measure distances along the highways and vyways of their lives in milesâ€“ and success in lifeâ€™s endeavors by â€˜how far youâ€™ve gotten.â€™ &lt;/i&gt;

How lovely. Taxpayers measure success in life&#039;s endeavors in miles (oops, kilometers), do they? I hope everyone has measured the success in their lives in units of length. By that token, marathon runners would score high. Actually, airplane pilots would be hugely successful. Truck drivers too, maybe? Are you just a yardsticker, or are you maybe a tape measurer? Do we teach this important metric in schools?

That&#039;s a real howler. =howl=. What&#039;s a &quot;vyway&quot; anyway? =smirk=.

This is one of the more astonishingly naive statements of space policy I&#039;ve ever heard, frankly.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah, the wit of DCSCA &#8230; Whose comments about why &#8220;it&#8217;s not&#8221; are the same old tired ones. Let me answer directly to one of the more hilarious &#8220;nots&#8221; we&#8217;re here instructed about.</p>
<p><i>Especially to the people who you pitch to pay the bills and who, for the most part, still measure distances along the highways and vyways of their lives in milesâ€“ and success in lifeâ€™s endeavors by â€˜how far youâ€™ve gotten.â€™ </i></p>
<p>How lovely. Taxpayers measure success in life&#8217;s endeavors in miles (oops, kilometers), do they? I hope everyone has measured the success in their lives in units of length. By that token, marathon runners would score high. Actually, airplane pilots would be hugely successful. Truck drivers too, maybe? Are you just a yardsticker, or are you maybe a tape measurer? Do we teach this important metric in schools?</p>
<p>That&#8217;s a real howler. =howl=. What&#8217;s a &#8220;vyway&#8221; anyway? =smirk=.</p>
<p>This is one of the more astonishingly naive statements of space policy I&#8217;ve ever heard, frankly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rand Simberg</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375749</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rand Simberg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 03:04:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375749</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;em&gt;Fridayâ€™s award gives them guaranteed government financing (as if theyâ€™d do it on their own) &lt;/em&gt;

Friday&#039;s award only gives them government financing if they meet their specified milestones, unlike traditional NASA contractors, who get paid regardless of results.  There is nothing &quot;guaranteed&quot; about it.

Are you stupid, or just ignorant?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Fridayâ€™s award gives them guaranteed government financing (as if theyâ€™d do it on their own) </em></p>
<p>Friday&#8217;s award only gives them government financing if they meet their specified milestones, unlike traditional NASA contractors, who get paid regardless of results.  There is nothing &#8220;guaranteed&#8221; about it.</p>
<p>Are you stupid, or just ignorant?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Coastal Ron</title>
		<link>http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/08/03/warm-reactions-mostly-from-politicians-to-ccicap-awards/#comment-375743</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Coastal Ron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 00:35:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=5798#comment-375743</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[DCSCA wrote @ August 5th, 2012 at 4:17 pm

&quot;&lt;i&gt;Mercedes are German.&lt;/i&gt;&quot;

You really don&#039;t know how analogies work, do you?

First of all, you can&#039;t buy a Soyuz - you can purchase a ride on one if Russia let&#039;s you, but they don&#039;t have to.  Do you understand that?

Secondly, in case you haven&#039;t noticed, there are other car options if Mercedes doesn&#039;t want to sell you a car, and other beer options if AB doesn&#039;t want to sell you beer.  That&#039;s called choice, which we don&#039;t have right now.  Do you understand that too Mr. Putin lover?

Sheesh, what a maroon.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DCSCA wrote @ August 5th, 2012 at 4:17 pm</p>
<p>&#8220;<i>Mercedes are German.</i>&#8221;</p>
<p>You really don&#8217;t know how analogies work, do you?</p>
<p>First of all, you can&#8217;t buy a Soyuz &#8211; you can purchase a ride on one if Russia let&#8217;s you, but they don&#8217;t have to.  Do you understand that?</p>
<p>Secondly, in case you haven&#8217;t noticed, there are other car options if Mercedes doesn&#8217;t want to sell you a car, and other beer options if AB doesn&#8217;t want to sell you beer.  That&#8217;s called choice, which we don&#8217;t have right now.  Do you understand that too Mr. Putin lover?</p>
<p>Sheesh, what a maroon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
